Playboy and the objectification of women

[omega 616]

snip

Wearing slutty clothes is a "please rape me" sign, the girls who go out dressed like that know what effect there having on the drooling masses, they know that they are running hte risk of getting attacked. If a heavy smoker gets cancer I am not going to give him any sympathy, if a drinker gets a hangover or dies I still won't give them any sympathy ... so why should I cry a river for somebody who knew the risks but still decided to look like a slut?

My second biggest turn off is a girl who thinks it's ok to go out dressed like that, you can usually tell who they are during the day aswell. "Platinum blonde" orange faces, the latest fashion (at the moment it's leggings and those hats with the top cut off, so it looks like a wooly hairband) *shudders*

I can guess how bad rape is, I can guess at how it can fuck up somebodies life and I would still be way off how bad it actually is but if your going out dressed erotically don't expect symapthy from me.

If there self esteem is so low they have to make yourself look slutty to get attention, to make them feel good, I pity them. If it works for them however, then why stop them from doing playboy?

I see cat, I think girl ... don't know why. I always end up getting annoyed with bisexuals, everyone of them I have spoken to has pissed me off, maybe you will break the cycle.

I think that women being "lesser" then men is still just the "women belong in the kitchen" thing, as the generations go on, I think, it will lessen and lessen. Unless girls choose to undermine themselvs in the way they are doing now.

Look at that, I just changed my own viewpoint. I have gone from "It empowers women" to "it is them undermining themselvs". I think the only way women will be totaly equally to men is if they stop with the playboy, porn etc and stop with the going out like a slut thing.

We view them as meat 'cos they dress up and act as meat, if they acted prim and proper and put some clothes on, I bet men would be less "show us yer tits!" and be more "hi, how are you?".

It's ok, I often come across as an aggresive ass. I will say something perfectly innocent or a joke and it gets taken as this massive personal insult.

 

[Hap2]

Ah, you have made one mistake, I never implied nor argued that a photograph should give another person the idea of who a person is as an individual, only that it cannot do such a thing, it is impossible for it and as a result can be an influence in portraying an idea that may not be true in real life, but one that some people can mistakenly take as an accurate representation of the real thing. If anything I suppose I am siding with Plato, at least in this manner on this particular medium, and the possibility of harm that a form of art like photography can cause if used improperly or in a certain way.

...alright, why is Playboy an improper use of art? porn in general?

Well, all Art needs an audience, for as I see it Art is a method of communicating what is or can be real within Reality to both artist and viewer. Viewers vary a lot, and not every single one them will agree on what they consider most real to their individual view of overall Reality that they find within, around or about an artwork. One viewer might enjoy the form a work takes, while another might enjoy the feeling the work might express, and so on and so forth. Others may not be so deep, and may take a work at face value alone. Not to say this is wrong, but in the example of that Jesus and Ants piece that is being debated upon in the Religion and Politics forum, interpretations can get fairly crazy and rile people up, even if that interpretation was far off from the original meaning the artist was trying to convey. Say a person looks at Playboy then, and takes the subject, and interprets the women in their suggestive poses to be an accurate representation of what a woman is: an object to be viewed and admired, rather than another individual. They may not consciously and literally think it as such, but their thought process could be influenced by it. After all, there are plenty of things that alter our thought process without us even thinking about it, we are indeed particular beings with a limited perspective based on our experiences and our corporeal forms.

So basically to sum it up, all forms of Art are dependent on their audience as much as their artist, not every single person is going to take a work and contemplate it as one of Art (as the Institutional theory might suggest). Humans each have their own individual perspectives and interpretations, and they can influence one another and become (to borrow from Tolstoy) "infectious", in influencing others. It is never a certainty, but does it make the possibility of Playboy contributing objectifying women possible due to the variety of individual interpretations, even if it was not their original intention? Yes, it does. Just think of the Grand Theft Auto series and its contribution to the ongoing debate as to whether or not video games are harmful. It was definitely not Rockstar's intention to do so, but because of the interpretations of some people, it most definitely does in their perspective of Reality.

Just take note that I do not think it is a bad thing or a good thing, I am only interested in the effect it can cause on influencing human thought and behaviour, despite whether or not it was the intended one by the original artists

Of course, this line of reasoning also suggests that games like Grand Theft Auto--which portray people as victims waiting to happen (violence objects, in a sense) and police officers as violent racists--also have a deleterious effect on certain individuals, who would be consciously or subconsciously affected by the images the material presents. These games do characterize the vast majority of human beings as wandering blood-filled mannequins who can be killed with little substantial consequence.

Does anything distinguish this fantasy from the one presented by Playboy? Is GTA, then, a misuse of art?

You are misinterpreting and diverting the argument needlessly. By 'improper', I am talking about the audience, not the artist. The audience can use Art improperly, and come to ultimately negative conclusions that were never intended by the artist, for it is out of the artist's control what the audience takes away from the artwork, and if it is something negative and harmful to others, then it is an improper use of the artwork by the audience. So as such, yes, a person can take away from Playboy because of the certain portrayal of the women and limitations of the medium, that women are objects for viewing pleasure and little else. I am not stating a universal here, I am stating that is indeed possible and can contribute.

 

[quiet_samurai]

I think the only people that have a problem with Playboy and things of similar nature are either just Puritans, people who don't mind their own fucking business, and people that are jealous. Honestly if you don't like something then don't buy it, or be around it, or put yourself in a postion that you might encounter it, and if you do then just walk away.

I honestly don't think that Playboy objectifies women, I don't think porn in general does either. Mostly because these women do it on their own free will and many get paid very, very well to do it. And as far as something that uses the sexual nature of woman to sell something, Playboy is actually pretty classy, and not nearly as graphic as other magazines or websites.

And the reason it is losing money is because people no longer have to buy the magazine to appreciate it's more popular trait, naked women, when they have the internet and sites that let you stream porn for free. It's just an obsolete form of entertainment, and will probably not be around for much longer.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I can guess how bad rape is, I can guess at how it can fuck up somebodies life and I would still be way off how bad it actually is but if your going out dressed erotically don't expect symapthy from me.

Fair enough.. this is kind of moot anyway as very very few people are ever raped by people they don't already know.

It's a sticky issue for me though because it feeds into the whole legal side of things. Conviction rates for rape cases are incredibly low, largely due to the fact that we place so much impetus on the victim to prove that she's 'not that kind of girl'. I know from experience that you can have genetic evidence, massive physical trauma and a direct eyewitness and still not secure a rape conviction, and that's kind of wrong.

But yeah, off topic, we should drop this or discuss it elsewhere.

If there self esteem is so low they have to make yourself look slutty to get attention, to make them feel good, I pity them. If it works for them however, then why stop them from doing playboy?

Yeah, you're right. They themselves are not the problem, if anything they're more of a symptom, and stopping them from doing what they want would just be unfair. As a feminist though (well sort of, I have real problems with a lot of what passes for feminism) I do think we should be trying to build a society where women are valued for more than just being pretty or being fuckable, and if we actually did that I don't think playboy as it stands would have much of a place.

Look at that, I just changed my own viewpoint. I have gone from "It empowers women" to "it is them undermining themselvs". I think the only way women will be totaly equally to men is if they stop with the playboy, porn etc and stop with the going out like a slut thing.

I agree with you, but I'd change it to 'when women can derive value from something other than getting sexual attention from men', and I think we as men do have a role to play. If we don't recognize and celebrate women for anything beyond having nice tits or looking pretty, a lot of women will just keep pandering to what they think men want.

 

[Raziel_Likes_Souls]

Yeah... Playboy's the wrong target here. You want tasteless objectification and the setting of unrealistic physical standards for women (though not misogyny, really)... look no further than Cosmopolitan, US, and People.

WINNER!

Everything I could ever say about objectivication, has just been said.

 

[realslimshadowen]

snip

Wearing slutty clothes is a "please rape me" sign, the girls who go out dressed like that know what effect there having on the drooling masses, they know that they are running hte risk of getting attacked. If a heavy smoker gets cancer I am not going to give him any sympathy, if a drinker gets a hangover or dies I still won't give them any sympathy ... so why should I cry a river for somebody who knew the risks but still decided to look like a slut?

My second biggest turn off is a girl who thinks it's ok to go out dressed like that, you can usually tell who they are during the day aswell. "Platinum blonde" orange faces, the latest fashion (at the moment it's leggings and those hats with the top cut off, so it looks like a wooly hairband) *shudders*

I can guess how bad rape is, I can guess at how it can fuck up somebodies life and I would still be way off how bad it actually is but if your going out dressed erotically don't expect symapthy from me.

If there self esteem is so low they have to make yourself look slutty to get attention, to make them feel good, I pity them. If it works for them however, then why stop them from doing playboy?

I see cat, I think girl ... don't know why. I always end up getting annoyed with bisexuals, everyone of them I have spoken to has pissed me off, maybe you will break the cycle.

I think that women being "lesser" then men is still just the "women belong in the kitchen" thing, as the generations go on, I think, it will lessen and lessen. Unless girls choose to undermine themselvs in the way they are doing now.

Look at that, I just changed my own viewpoint. I have gone from "It empowers women" to "it is them undermining themselvs". I think the only way women will be totaly equally to men is if they stop with the playboy, porn etc and stop with the going out like a slut thing.

We view them as meat 'cos they dress up and act as meat, if they acted prim and proper and put some clothes on, I bet men would be less "show us yer tits!" and be more "hi, how are you?".

It's ok, I often come across as an aggresive ass. I will say something perfectly innocent or a joke and it gets taken as this massive personal insult.

I'm not even sure where to start with this.

Okay. Um...

Let's start here.

First, define slut.

Second, explain why dressing in revealing clothing makes one a slut. (Don't give any bullshit about you saying "like" a slut. If dressing in revealing clothing is dressing like a slut, then clearly sluts dress in revealing clothing.)

Third, inform us as to why being a slut is a bad thing.

Fourth, elaborate on how choosing to smoke or drink, which is directly related to health problems, is in any way equivalent to someone else choosing to force themselves on another person without their consent because of the way they chose to dress, and no "fuck me" pumps, tight jeans and a crop top are not consent. (Although I will grant that high heels can cause chronic back issues.)

Fifth, tell why you think blaming the victim of a crime for the criminal's decision is in any way justifiable.

Sixth, help us understand where you got your terrible knowledge of the history of gender relations in the industrialized world, where back when women acted "prim and proper" not only did no one ever get raped but indeed it was a utopia of equal rights.

Finally, I'll ask you to attempt raping someone dressed like a slut, and then from the Internet room in the jail tell us how "you're dressed like that, so you were clearly asking for it" went over with her, the jury, the judge, and your real life family and friends. I await the results of our little social experiment with bated breath. Hey, are you in Florida? I hear they have concealed carry laws and very loose definitions of reasonable force in self defense. Oh, how we shall laugh at your obituary.

Take your time.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Finally, I'll ask you to attempt raping someone dressed like a slut, and then from the Internet room in the jail tell us how "you're dressed like that, so you were clearly asking for it" went over with her, the jury, the judge, and your real life family and friends. I await the results of our little social experiment with bated breath. Hey, are you in Florida? I hear they have concealed carry laws and very loose definitions of reasonable force in self defense. Oh, how we shall laugh at your obituary.

Well, if we're going to run with this I'll carry on.

I'd laugh at that, but really it's kind of sad because you're kind of wrong. Really, all you have to do is get to know your victim first. Spend a couple of weeks hanging out with them, take note of how they behave, then you can pretty much do what you want. Your chances of conviction are now negligible unless your defence seriously cocks up.

As I said, the legal system (in the UK certainly, and I don't think the US is much better) is fucked when it comes to prosecuting rape due to the way reasonable doubt is interpreted. Basically, if it can't be proved beyond any trace of doubt that the sex wasn't consensual (for example through a confession by the perpetrator) then conviction is almost impossible. I know people who are doing research in this area with a view to promoting policy reform, but for the foreseeable future you can pretty much get away with raping whoever you want as long as you can introduce a shred of doubt into the prosecution.

Put it this way, here in the UK an estimated 95% of rape victims don't report the crime, or do and then don't press charges (to be fair, most of those will have been raped by partners or spouses). Of those that do manage to get a court case going, only about 6.5% will secure convictions, and those will only be the most clear cut and obvious of cases, usually where one side is clearly an 'innocent victim'.

Pretty fucking depressing, isn't it. At least it makes me so.

I'm agreeing with you in a roundabout way though. It's irresponsible to put any blame on the victim, because that kind of thinking is part of the reason why so many rapists are actually getting away with it.

 

[realslimshadowen]

Yeah, I was trying to be polite for most of the post; that last point was just me losing control, not any attempt at an actual premise to base an argument on.

 

[Veylon]

Playboy doesn't seem to be actively harmful as far as objectification goes. It doesn't pretend that it has a message or that women ought to be objectified. It just does what it does and is nothing more.

What's really harmful are otherwise intelligent people who will use supposed moral arguments or pseudoscience to try to convince society that women are inferior in X way or that women ought to be controlled. It wasn't playboy-esque porn that held back women's votes, it was the respectable establishment that thought it knew better. It was scientists and psychologists who were convinced that women lacked the intellectual capacity for political judgement. It was religious leaders and moralists who believed that the female mind and soul were lacking in the spiritual fortitude to do right, needing men to keep them under control. The danger is from the kind of people who seem like they know what they're talking about and they can be quite convincing.

 

[Danpascooch]

It's the Daily Show.

There's no bigger joke.

OT: To a degree, but nowhere near as bad as anything you'd find in the UK. *shudder*

... look no further than Cosmopolitan, US, and People.

FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU-

I HATE THAT MAGAZINE

The daily show is awesome, if you're looking for the biggest joke around, tune in to Fox News and watch Glenn Beck

 

[omega 616]

I'm not even sure where to start with this.

Okay. Um...

Let's start here.

First, define slut.

Second, explain why dressing in revealing clothing makes one a slut. (Don't give any bullshit about you saying "like" a slut. If dressing in revealing clothing is dressing like a slut, then clearly sluts dress in revealing clothing.)

Third, inform us as to why being a slut is a bad thing.

Fourth, elaborate on how choosing to smoke or drink, which is directly related to health problems, is in any way equivalent to someone else choosing to force themselves on another person without their consent because of the way they chose to dress, and no "fuck me" pumps, tight jeans and a crop top are not consent. (Although I will grant that high heels can cause chronic back issues.)

Fifth, tell why you think blaming the victim of a crime for the criminal's decision is in any way justifiable.

Sixth, help us understand where you got your terrible knowledge of the history of gender relations in the industrialized world, where back when women acted "prim and proper" not only did no one ever get raped but indeed it was a utopia of equal rights.

Finally, I'll ask you to attempt raping someone dressed like a slut, and then from the Internet room in the jail tell us how "you're dressed like that, so you were clearly asking for it" went over with her, the jury, the judge, and your real life family and friends. I await the results of our little social experiment with bated breath. Hey, are you in Florida? I hear they have concealed carry laws and very loose definitions of reasonable force in self defense. Oh, how we shall laugh at your obituary.

Take your time.

1) If you don't know what a slut is then go and google it. If you do, you have an image that pops into your head when your asked to think of one, so that is what I am talking about.

2) Asked and answred.

3) Who said a slut was a bad thing? Whether you be male or female a slut isn't a bad thing, unless you care what people think about you. Other attach a negative connotation to being a slut, I say if you love sex then go bonkers.

4) What? I will try to answer this cluster fuck of a question/point though. Go and read my previous posts, more accuratly the bit were I said "The guy probably started the evening not wanting to rape anybody, the thought probably never crossed his mind". If you don't know what alcohol does to your inabitions, go and google it.

5) Again, go back and read my previous posts. I am not saying it is 100% the womans fault, I said there is some blame responsability to be placed on the women IF she is dressed like a slut. If the women is dressed in a baggy hoody and baggy jeans looking like a ganster then there is no responsability on her. (remember this is just MY opinion)

6) Seriously, you need to read my other posts.

I know women back in the day were raped etc (Jack the ripper cut the breasts off women for example) and how were things equal rights? When women were always considered less then men and should stay at home cooking and cleaning. Only recently has things started to change.

The last little rant has been delt with by somebody else.

Happy? I don't care either way to be honest.

 

[omega 616]

1) If you don't know what a slut is then go and google it. If you do, you have an image that pops into your head when your asked to think of one, so that is what I am talking about.

2) Asked and answered.

3) Who said a slut was a bad thing? Whether you be male or female a slut isn't a bad thing, unless you care what people think about you. Other attach a negative connotation to being a slut, I say if you love sex then go bonkers.

4) What? I will try to answer this cluster fuck of a question/point though. Go and read my previous posts, more accurately the bit were I said "The guy probably started the evening not wanting to rape anybody, the thought probably never crossed his mind". If you don't know what alcohol does to your inhibitions, go and google it.

5) Again, go back and read my previous posts. I am not saying it is 100% the woman's fault, I said there is some blame responsibility to be placed on the women IF she is dressed like a slut. If the women is dressed in a baggy hoody and baggy jeans looking like a gangster then there is no responsibility on her. (remember this is just MY opinion)

6) Seriously, you need to read my other posts.

I know women back in the day were raped etc (Jack the ripper cut the breasts off women for example) and how were things equal rights? When women were always considered less then men and should stay at home cooking and cleaning. Only recently has things started to change.

The last little rant has been dealt with by somebody else.

Happy? I don't care either way to be honest.

1) Definitions are not objective, but subjective. Tell me what you mean when you say slut. It's important.

2) And your answers are vague bullshit that have never so much as seen words like "logic" out of the metaphorical corner of their eye. So I'll take that as a concession. Thanks.

3) No one said it. You implied it. Words have meanings, see. Your words imply that rape as a tragic but inevitable result for women who dare leave the house in anything that doesn't cover them from neck to toes. If that's not what you mean, learn words use better please you should. It would prevent people like me from having hilarious misunderstandings about what you mean.

4) So you blame the victim, rather than the person who chose to commit the crime. Alcohol is no excuse. It's not an excuse when someone drinks and drives, it's not an excuse when someone drinks and rapes.

5) And I'm one of those crrrrazy motherfuckers who thinks that while maybe someone should have locked their doors that doesn't mean they're to blame for getting robbed. Newsflash: most robberies probably don't occur to unlocked houses, and most rapes probably aren't the inevitable result of a woman dressing like a slut.

1) No, it's not important.

2) You answered your own bullshit question, what more is there to say?

3) "learn words use better please you should", you first.

It isn't just how they dress, it's getting home by yourself.

4) Did I say it was an excuse? No. It is a reason it happens (sometimes), was that not implied or did you not get that?

There are also more occasions this happens, not just at night when a girl is an easy target. Like a women walking through a park, being stalked first etc it's not like all rape victims are always drunk and pressed like lap dancers

5) just "lol", Newsflash means the next thing you say will be a fact but you follow it with "most robberies probably don't occur to unlocked houses". Most robberies are done to stupid people, leaving there keys near the front door and visible through a door or not shredding important information.

I have seen somebody get the locks changed on somebody Else's house, they then robbed the place and left, locking the door behind them. All done by using bank statements recovered from there bin.

That's off the topic though.

You seem to be missing my point entirely, I am not saying the whole entire blame on the woman! I am saying she has to take SOME responsibility IF she is dressed like a slut, making her way home alone and is drunk to the point of struggling to walk or speak.

If she is dressed still nicely but more refined, by which I mean less skin on show, with a group of friends and sobre/tipsy then I wouldn't put any responsibility on her.

I am done trying to explain this to you.

 

[Susan Arendt]

Playboy's original philosophy was celebrating the beauty of the female body. There's a reason there's a whole joke about only enjoying it "for the articles"- because it was meant to be high quality, cover to cover. The original Playmates weren't allowed to have tattoos or have had plastic surgery. Times have changed and Playboy has had to loosen up its strict guidelines, but it has always aimed to be as empowering for its women as it is enticing for its readers. A woman could be proud of appearing in Playboy, because the mere fact that she was allowed to grace its pages meant that she was an exceptional beauty.

At least, that's how it was for the majority of Playboy's life span...things may have changed in recent years.